Smith et al v. Bulls-Hit Ranch and Farm, Inc. et al
Filing
13
ORDER granting 12 motion to amend/correct; granting 12 Motion for joinder. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Morris on 10/18/2012. (DLC)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION
LEROY SMITH and DENNIS NASH,
individually and on behalf of all other
persons similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
CASE NO. 3:12-cv-449-J-34TEM
BULLS-HIT RANCH AND FARM,
THOMAS R. LEE, and RONALD UZZLE,
Defendants.
___________________________________
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion to Join a Plaintiff and
to Amend the Complaint (Doc. #12, “Motion”), filed October 8, 2012. Plaintiffs seek leave
to join Alfonso Grant as a plaintiff in this case and “to amend the complaint accordingly.”
Motion at 1. Plaintiffs’ counsel avers counsel for Bulls-Hit Ranch and Farm (“Bulls-Hit”) and
Thomas R. Lee (“Lee”) have consented to the joinder and the amendment of the
complaint.1 Motion at 2. Further, Plaintiffs’ counsel advises it has been unable to ascertain
if substituted service of process has been effected upon Defendant Ronald Uzzle, who has
not been personally served in this case. See id. Review of the Motion and the proposed
amended complaint reveals Plaintiffs seek to expand the scope of this purported class
action to include “claims of workers whom Uzzle contracted to furnish to any agricultural
1
Plaintiffs’ counsel also states that Defendants Lee and Bulls-Hit have entered into
a settlement agreement that would resolve all of the plaintiffs’ claims against them, as well
as identical claims of a worker, Alfonso Grant.” Motion at 1-2.
employers in the relevant period, not just those whom Uzzle furnished to Lee and Bulls-Hit.”
Id.
Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that leave to amend "shall
be freely given when justice so requires." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15; Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S.
178, 182 (1962). In the language of the Foman Court,
In the absence of any apparent or declared reason–such as undue delay,
bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure
deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the
opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, futility of
amendment, etc.– the leave sought should, as the rules require, be
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?